Comments

It just goes to prove the dis-jointed thinking that goes on in the council...

Who ever heard of a smell coming from a waste station, and why bother dealing with it at the planning stage when it's only the mushrooms (fed on **** and kept in the dark) who will be affected anyway

It just goes to prove the dis-jointed thinking that goes on in the council...
Who ever heard of a smell coming from a waste station, and why bother dealing with it at the planning stage when it's only the mushrooms (fed on **** and kept in the dark) who will be affected anywayHove Actually

It just goes to prove the dis-jointed thinking that goes on in the council...

Who ever heard of a smell coming from a waste station, and why bother dealing with it at the planning stage when it's only the mushrooms (fed on **** and kept in the dark) who will be affected anyway

Score: 0

NickBtn
12:17pm Thu 3 Jan 13

This location isn't suitable. It could be argued when there was good road access with a dual carriageway from the A27.

Now, with even more council dis-jointed thinking (thanks Hove Actually) - the Lewes Road will become single carriageway with a new bus lane. This will mean that the recycling lorries from around the county will need to wait in new queues, polluting more and costing time/money.

This location isn't suitable. It could be argued when there was good road access with a dual carriageway from the A27.
Now, with even more council dis-jointed thinking (thanks Hove Actually) - the Lewes Road will become single carriageway with a new bus lane. This will mean that the recycling lorries from around the county will need to wait in new queues, polluting more and costing time/money.NickBtn

This location isn't suitable. It could be argued when there was good road access with a dual carriageway from the A27.

Now, with even more council dis-jointed thinking (thanks Hove Actually) - the Lewes Road will become single carriageway with a new bus lane. This will mean that the recycling lorries from around the county will need to wait in new queues, polluting more and costing time/money.

Score: 0

Fight_Back
12:32pm Thu 3 Jan 13

So let me get this right - the waste station stinks ? I'm sure my memory remembers both the Labour council, Labour councillors and the waste company promising this wouldn't be the case when locals were objecting to the plans. So Labour and Veolia BOTH lied !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So let me get this right - the waste station stinks ? I'm sure my memory remembers both the Labour council, Labour councillors and the waste company promising this wouldn't be the case when locals were objecting to the plans. So Labour and Veolia BOTH lied !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Fight_Back

So let me get this right - the waste station stinks ? I'm sure my memory remembers both the Labour council, Labour councillors and the waste company promising this wouldn't be the case when locals were objecting to the plans. So Labour and Veolia BOTH lied !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Score: 0

Mr P Brown
12:37pm Thu 3 Jan 13

NickBtn wrote…

This location isn't suitable. It could be argued when there was good road access with a dual carriageway from the A27.

Now, with even more council dis-jointed thinking (thanks Hove Actually) - the Lewes Road will become single carriageway with a new bus lane. This will mean that the recycling lorries from around the county will need to wait in new queues, polluting more and costing time/money.

They got round this problem by conveniently leaving HGV's off the consultation documents.

[quote][p][bold]NickBtn[/bold] wrote:
This location isn't suitable. It could be argued when there was good road access with a dual carriageway from the A27.
Now, with even more council dis-jointed thinking (thanks Hove Actually) - the Lewes Road will become single carriageway with a new bus lane. This will mean that the recycling lorries from around the county will need to wait in new queues, polluting more and costing time/money.[/p][/quote]They got round this problem by conveniently leaving HGV's off the consultation documents.Mr P Brown

NickBtn wrote…

This location isn't suitable. It could be argued when there was good road access with a dual carriageway from the A27.

Now, with even more council dis-jointed thinking (thanks Hove Actually) - the Lewes Road will become single carriageway with a new bus lane. This will mean that the recycling lorries from around the county will need to wait in new queues, polluting more and costing time/money.

They got round this problem by conveniently leaving HGV's off the consultation documents.

Score: 0

jools99
1:45pm Thu 3 Jan 13

This just goes to confirm (as we already know) that the Council does not listen to the valid objections raised at the so-called consultation stage. The issue of bad odours was raised at the public meetings (I know, as I raised this issue at a public meeting held in the Stanford Avenue Methodist Church) and the meeting was assured that this would not happen. This Council goes through the motions of public consultation and then does exactly what it had originally planned. The Council and Councillors should remember that they are supposed to serve the community and listen to valid objections to schemes and make adaptations, but they rarely do so. It's a case of the tail wagging the dog!

This just goes to confirm (as we already know) that the Council does not listen to the valid objections raised at the so-called consultation stage. The issue of bad odours was raised at the public meetings (I know, as I raised this issue at a public meeting held in the Stanford Avenue Methodist Church) and the meeting was assured that this would not happen. This Council goes through the motions of public consultation and then does exactly what it had originally planned. The Council and Councillors should remember that they are supposed to serve the community and listen to valid objections to schemes and make adaptations, but they rarely do so. It's a case of the tail wagging the dog!jools99

This just goes to confirm (as we already know) that the Council does not listen to the valid objections raised at the so-called consultation stage. The issue of bad odours was raised at the public meetings (I know, as I raised this issue at a public meeting held in the Stanford Avenue Methodist Church) and the meeting was assured that this would not happen. This Council goes through the motions of public consultation and then does exactly what it had originally planned. The Council and Councillors should remember that they are supposed to serve the community and listen to valid objections to schemes and make adaptations, but they rarely do so. It's a case of the tail wagging the dog!

Score: 0

Fight_Back
2:52pm Thu 3 Jan 13

jools99 wrote…

This just goes to confirm (as we already know) that the Council does not listen to the valid objections raised at the so-called consultation stage. The issue of bad odours was raised at the public meetings (I know, as I raised this issue at a public meeting held in the Stanford Avenue Methodist Church) and the meeting was assured that this would not happen. This Council goes through the motions of public consultation and then does exactly what it had originally planned. The Council and Councillors should remember that they are supposed to serve the community and listen to valid objections to schemes and make adaptations, but they rarely do so. It's a case of the tail wagging the dog!

I think it's more that politicians from all parties will lie to get what they want. Look at Labours lies over this and the King Alfred. look at the Lib Dem and Norman Baker lies over the Amex stadium. Look at the Tory lies over the marina development. Look at the Green lies in general.

[quote][p][bold]jools99[/bold] wrote:
This just goes to confirm (as we already know) that the Council does not listen to the valid objections raised at the so-called consultation stage. The issue of bad odours was raised at the public meetings (I know, as I raised this issue at a public meeting held in the Stanford Avenue Methodist Church) and the meeting was assured that this would not happen. This Council goes through the motions of public consultation and then does exactly what it had originally planned. The Council and Councillors should remember that they are supposed to serve the community and listen to valid objections to schemes and make adaptations, but they rarely do so. It's a case of the tail wagging the dog![/p][/quote]I think it's more that politicians from all parties will lie to get what they want. Look at Labours lies over this and the King Alfred. look at the Lib Dem and Norman Baker lies over the Amex stadium. Look at the Tory lies over the marina development. Look at the Green lies in general.Fight_Back

jools99 wrote…

This just goes to confirm (as we already know) that the Council does not listen to the valid objections raised at the so-called consultation stage. The issue of bad odours was raised at the public meetings (I know, as I raised this issue at a public meeting held in the Stanford Avenue Methodist Church) and the meeting was assured that this would not happen. This Council goes through the motions of public consultation and then does exactly what it had originally planned. The Council and Councillors should remember that they are supposed to serve the community and listen to valid objections to schemes and make adaptations, but they rarely do so. It's a case of the tail wagging the dog!

I think it's more that politicians from all parties will lie to get what they want. Look at Labours lies over this and the King Alfred. look at the Lib Dem and Norman Baker lies over the Amex stadium. Look at the Tory lies over the marina development. Look at the Green lies in general.

Score: 0

NickBtn
3:13pm Thu 3 Jan 13

Fight_Back wrote…

jools99 wrote…

This just goes to confirm (as we already know) that the Council does not listen to the valid objections raised at the so-called consultation stage. The issue of bad odours was raised at the public meetings (I know, as I raised this issue at a public meeting held in the Stanford Avenue Methodist Church) and the meeting was assured that this would not happen. This Council goes through the motions of public consultation and then does exactly what it had originally planned. The Council and Councillors should remember that they are supposed to serve the community and listen to valid objections to schemes and make adaptations, but they rarely do so. It's a case of the tail wagging the dog!

I think it's more that politicians from all parties will lie to get what they want. Look at Labours lies over this and the King Alfred. look at the Lib Dem and Norman Baker lies over the Amex stadium. Look at the Tory lies over the marina development. Look at the Green lies in general.

It really is a case of the politicians think they know best and don't want to listen to ideas and concerns.

Unfortunately it seems to be true for all parties. I hoped that the greens would be different - be more consultative and pragmatic. The opposite seems to be true and that, combined with extreme policies, will see them only having one term (probably anywhere if people learn/see what's happened in Brighton and Hove).

The real pity is that so much creative energy goes in from politicians and council officers (see P Brown's comment) to get a flawed idea through rather than listen, revise, improve and get what's best.

[quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]jools99[/bold] wrote:
This just goes to confirm (as we already know) that the Council does not listen to the valid objections raised at the so-called consultation stage. The issue of bad odours was raised at the public meetings (I know, as I raised this issue at a public meeting held in the Stanford Avenue Methodist Church) and the meeting was assured that this would not happen. This Council goes through the motions of public consultation and then does exactly what it had originally planned. The Council and Councillors should remember that they are supposed to serve the community and listen to valid objections to schemes and make adaptations, but they rarely do so. It's a case of the tail wagging the dog![/p][/quote]I think it's more that politicians from all parties will lie to get what they want. Look at Labours lies over this and the King Alfred. look at the Lib Dem and Norman Baker lies over the Amex stadium. Look at the Tory lies over the marina development. Look at the Green lies in general.[/p][/quote]It really is a case of the politicians think they know best and don't want to listen to ideas and concerns.
Unfortunately it seems to be true for all parties. I hoped that the greens would be different - be more consultative and pragmatic. The opposite seems to be true and that, combined with extreme policies, will see them only having one term (probably anywhere if people learn/see what's happened in Brighton and Hove).
The real pity is that so much creative energy goes in from politicians and council officers (see P Brown's comment) to get a flawed idea through rather than listen, revise, improve and get what's best.NickBtn

Fight_Back wrote…

jools99 wrote…

This just goes to confirm (as we already know) that the Council does not listen to the valid objections raised at the so-called consultation stage. The issue of bad odours was raised at the public meetings (I know, as I raised this issue at a public meeting held in the Stanford Avenue Methodist Church) and the meeting was assured that this would not happen. This Council goes through the motions of public consultation and then does exactly what it had originally planned. The Council and Councillors should remember that they are supposed to serve the community and listen to valid objections to schemes and make adaptations, but they rarely do so. It's a case of the tail wagging the dog!

I think it's more that politicians from all parties will lie to get what they want. Look at Labours lies over this and the King Alfred. look at the Lib Dem and Norman Baker lies over the Amex stadium. Look at the Tory lies over the marina development. Look at the Green lies in general.

It really is a case of the politicians think they know best and don't want to listen to ideas and concerns.

Unfortunately it seems to be true for all parties. I hoped that the greens would be different - be more consultative and pragmatic. The opposite seems to be true and that, combined with extreme policies, will see them only having one term (probably anywhere if people learn/see what's happened in Brighton and Hove).

The real pity is that so much creative energy goes in from politicians and council officers (see P Brown's comment) to get a flawed idea through rather than listen, revise, improve and get what's best.

Score: 0

Tis I
3:42pm Thu 3 Jan 13

So is this safe to burn in the Newhaven incinerator (sorry energy from waste facility) when it gets there?

So is this safe to burn in the Newhaven incinerator (sorry energy from waste facility) when it gets there?Tis I

So is this safe to burn in the Newhaven incinerator (sorry energy from waste facility) when it gets there?

Score: 0

twosugars
4:38pm Thu 3 Jan 13

Fight_Back wrote…

So let me get this right - the waste station stinks ? I'm sure my memory remembers both the Labour council, Labour councillors and the waste company promising this wouldn't be the case when locals were objecting to the plans. So Labour and Veolia BOTH lied !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

No suprise there then, Newhaven incinerator absolutely reeks when the wind is anywhere other than south westerly. they told us the fumes from the incinerator would be "cleaned" but the real stink comes from the piles of rubbish waiting to be burned

[quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote:
So let me get this right - the waste station stinks ? I'm sure my memory remembers both the Labour council, Labour councillors and the waste company promising this wouldn't be the case when locals were objecting to the plans. So Labour and Veolia BOTH lied !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]No suprise there then, Newhaven incinerator absolutely reeks when the wind is anywhere other than south westerly. they told us the fumes from the incinerator would be "cleaned" but the real stink comes from the piles of rubbish waiting to be burnedtwosugars

Fight_Back wrote…

So let me get this right - the waste station stinks ? I'm sure my memory remembers both the Labour council, Labour councillors and the waste company promising this wouldn't be the case when locals were objecting to the plans. So Labour and Veolia BOTH lied !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

No suprise there then, Newhaven incinerator absolutely reeks when the wind is anywhere other than south westerly. they told us the fumes from the incinerator would be "cleaned" but the real stink comes from the piles of rubbish waiting to be burned

Score: 0

Thumper Hove
4:40pm Thu 3 Jan 13

I'm only surprised by the 'revelation' that a waste station stinks! What did people think it was going to be like - roses and jasmine scented air?

What next? If you don't water plants they die?

I'm only surprised by the 'revelation' that a waste station stinks! What did people think it was going to be like - roses and jasmine scented air?
What next? If you don't water plants they die?Thumper Hove

I'm only surprised by the 'revelation' that a waste station stinks! What did people think it was going to be like - roses and jasmine scented air?

What next? If you don't water plants they die?

Score: 0

cookie_brighton
4:55pm Thu 3 Jan 13

I see no mention of the offence of polluting the atmosphere in the story.
If it were you or I causing the smell, the environmental department would be onto us and charge us with the offence.

I see no mention of the offence of polluting the atmosphere in the story.
If it were you or I causing the smell, the environmental department would be onto us and charge us with the offence.cookie_brighton

I see no mention of the offence of polluting the atmosphere in the story.
If it were you or I causing the smell, the environmental department would be onto us and charge us with the offence.

Score: 0

Old Ale Man
7:08am Fri 4 Jan 13

Our then Counsillor Kevin Allen spoke against this application at the planning meeting and now what he said has all come true and it was his own Labour councillor colleauges who did not support him and allowed this monstrosity to be built.

Our then Counsillor Kevin Allen spoke against this application at the planning meeting and now what he said has all come true and it was his own Labour councillor colleauges who did not support him and allowed this monstrosity to be built.Old Ale Man

Our then Counsillor Kevin Allen spoke against this application at the planning meeting and now what he said has all come true and it was his own Labour councillor colleauges who did not support him and allowed this monstrosity to be built.

Ipsoregulated

This website and associated newspapers adhere to the Independent Press Standards Organisation's Editors' Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about the editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then please contact the editor here. If you are dissatisfied with the response provided you can contact IPSO here